On Mon, 2021-04-19 at 09:27 +0200, Ondrej Dubaj wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 3:30 PM David Cantrell <dcantr...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 11:26:24AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > >Hijacking this thread originally about > > >https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271 > > > > > >What is the current thinking in Fedora about always running > > >"autoreconf -i" during builds that use autotools? > > > > I think we are likely to see the least problems for projects that > > created their configure.ac files using autoscan. For projects that > > constructed them manually or in other ways, we'll likely see some > > fallout. I would encourage maintainers to work towards fixing > > these > > things and contributing them back upstream. Still, we would need > > to > > provide a way to disable the autoreconf step for particular > > problematic packages. > > > > Some projects provide their own autotools macros and wrappers > > around > > autoreconf. For example, Xfce either provides or provided xdt- > > autogen > > as a wrapper to run autoreconf with the Xfce-specific macros and > > other > > defines available. If it's best to rerun xdt-autogen in these > > cases, > > how could we handle that in the spec file so it runs the correct > > 'autoreconf' command? > > > > >The cons of always autoreconfing are that it slows down builds, > > >sometimes considerably. It also could fail - I noticed that > > autoconf > > >2.71 has several incompatibilities with the most widely used > > autoconf > > >(2.69). > > > > I think the failures will be the most frustrating part of this > > rather > > than the build time. An FAQ or something of how to fix common > > failures for 2.71 would be useful for contributors. > > > > > Document with common failures and fixes already exists [1]. Also > multiple ways of testing are documented in the change proposal [2], > where the link to the document [1] is present. > > Updating autoconf to version 2.71 is a hard process, we are doing our > best to make it as fluent as possible. There is a copr created for > testing, bugs in bugzilla created (with link to change proposal) for > failing components and we are actively moving things forward. > > Hopefully it will be enough to make this possible. > > [1] > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SAGTJZEF9z_nkHMbXTF-YTTvKRja7ygfOOMzl-DYBSk/edit >
I almost missed this precious document, in my opinion it should go to the fedoraproject wiki pages along [2] The document covers almost all the problems that I found .... "if test "$ac_test_CFLAGS" = set" , stopped to work what is the correct replacement ? "if test -z $CFLAGS; then" or "if test $ac_test_CFLAGS; then" this second option was found here [3] [3] https://chromium.googlesource.com/external/github.com/Distrotech/autoconf/+/76754e04fce5f6a7701bec57b057020585df2ae3%5E%21/ > [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271#How_To_Test > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > _______________________________________________ > > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > Fedora Code of Conduct: > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > List Guidelines: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > List Archives: > > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure -- Sérgio M. B.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
